Re: spong's bad assumptions and virgin births - for jim

From: RFaussette@aol.com
Date: Thu Jan 02 2003 - 08:01:35 EST

  • Next message: Jan de Koning: "Re: Does the Bible teach a flat earth?"

    In a message dated 1/1/03 6:54:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, gmurphy@raex.com
    writes:

    > . The account of the creation of humanity in
    > Genesis 2:4b-25 is of course different, but these are two different
    > creation accounts.
    >
    >
    >

      I gave you a number of examples from a number of different religious
    horizons to demonstrate that virgin birth was a historically ancient concept.
    You are saying one of my examples is one of two accounts and I agree. what
    about the others that suggest the phenomena was a norm for the ancient world?
    You don't comment. What point are you making about the difference between
    virgin birth and virginal conception? You mean you can have a virginal
    conception and then not have a virginal birth? At what point is the male
    principle introduced in a case like that?
    rich

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Jan 05 2003 - 02:20:08 EST